Digital Cameras - Kyocera Finecam L4v Test Images

I've begun including links in our reviews to a Thumber-generated
index page for the test shots. The Thumber data includes a host of information
on the images, including shutter speed, ISOsetting, compression setting,
etc. Rather than clutter the page below with *all*that detail, we're posting
the Thumber index so only those interested inthe information need wade through
it!

Good resolution and detail (though some artifacts), with good overall
color.

The extreme tonal range of this image makes it a tough shot for many
digicams, which is precisely why I set it up this way, and why I shoot
it with no fill flash or reflector to open the shadows. The object is
to hold both highlight and shadow detail without producing a "flat"
picture with muddy colors, and the Finecam L4v did a fairly good job,
albeit with somewhat high contrast.

The shot at right was taken with a +0.3 EV exposure
compensation adjustment, which is actually a fair bit lower than what
the average digicam requires here. The lower midtones are a little dark
as a result of the high contrast, but still show pretty good detail.
I chose the Auto white balance as the most
accurate overall, though the resulting image had a slight reddish cast,
as did the Daylight setting. The Manual
setting produced warmer results, with a yellow cast.

Marti's skin tones are pretty natural here, but the blue flowers in the
bouquet are a bit dark. (Many digicams have trouble with this blue, often
producing purplish tints in it. The L4v actually did very well with the
color, rendering it only slightly dark, and with no sign of the usual
"purple problem.") Color looks good throughout the rest of the
frame as well, though the red flowers are on the verge of oversaturation.
Resolution is high, although with what appear to be some noise-related
artifacts, and some flattening of hair detail due to anti-noise processing.
Detail is quite good even in the shadows, although there's a bit of noise
there as well. A nice job overall.

To view the entire exposure series from -0.3 to +1.3 EV, see files L4VOUTAM1.HTM
through L4VOUTAP4.HTM on the thumbnail index page.

More defined detail and higher resolution, but
once again rather high contrast.

Overall results here are similar to the wider shot
above, in terms of exposure and color, and the L4v's 3x zoom lens helps
prevent distortion of Marti's features. Midtones are again dark, and overall
contrast is high, but detail is still moderate in the shadows. The shot
at right was taken with a +0.3 EV exposure compensation adjustment. Detail
and resolution are stronger in this close-up shot, with pretty good definition.
Image noise is again a little high in the shadows.

To view the entire exposure series from -0.3 to +1.0 EV, see files L4VFACM1.HTM
through L4VFACP3.HTM on the thumbnail index page.

Good intensity and coverage with the built-in flash, with good color
as well. Poor match with room lighting in slow-sync mode though.

The L4v's built-in flash illuminated the subject very well here, requiring
only +0.7 EV of exposure compensation to produce
a bright exposure with good color, a bit less than is usually required
for this shot. Colors are excellent, and the illumination is fairly even
(although it looks like there's some falloff in the left corners). Shooting
in slow-sync mode, the room lighting swamped the flash exposure, the shot
actually requiring an exposure cut of -0.3
EV. The longer exposure allowed in a great deal of the room lighting,
producing a very yellow cast. (Some cameras have their flashes balanced
to match the color of indoor lighting more closely, and adjust their auto
white balance setting accordingly. Like most cameras though, the L4v doesn't
do this.)

To view the entire flash exposure series from -0.3 to +1.3 EV, see files
L4VINFM1.HTM through L4VINFP4.HTM on the thumbnail
index page. To see the slow-sync flash exposure series from -0.7 to
+0.3, see files L4VINFSM2.HTM through L4VINFSP1.HTM.

Virtually identical results from all three white balance settings:
All have a slight yellow cast.

This shot is always a very tough test of a camera's white balance capability,
given the strong, yellowish color cast of the household incandescent bulbs
used for the lighting. All three of the L4v's relevant white balance settings
had just a little trouble here, producing nearly identical slight yellowish
color casts in the images. I chose the Auto setting for the main image
here, but it was really a toss-up between the three of them. While the
color cast is noticeable, I'd say that it's within acceptable bounds,
producing a fairly accurate representation of the original scene, preserving
the "mood" of the warm, incandescent room lighting. The exposures
at right were taken with +1.0 EV of exposure compensation, right about
average for this shot among the cameras I've tested.

To view the exposure series for these images, from 0 through +1.3 EV exposure
compensation adjustment, see files L4VINAP0.HTM through L4VINAP4.HTM for
the auto white balance setting, L4VINTP0.HTM through L4VINTP4.HTM for
the incandescent white balance setting, L4VINMP0.HTM through L4VINMP4.HTM
for the manual white balance setting, all on the thumbnail
index page.

The L4v's Auto white balance did the best job
here, producing the most accurate white value on the house trim and good
overall color. The Daylight setting also produced
good results, though with a slight yellow cast, but the Manual
setting was rather cool and bluish. Resolution isn't quite as good, and
the image has more artifacts than I would expect from a four-megapixel
camera. Still, the tree limbs above the roof and house front show good
detail, if somewhat soft with low definition. The corners of the frame
have even softer details, but the effect isn't overly strong.

Lower resolution than I'd expect from a 4 megapixel camera. Overexposure
with the default setting and high contrast limit dynamic range severely.

This image is shot at infinity to test far-field
lens performance. NOTE that this image cannot be directly compared to
the other "house" shot, which is a poster, shot in the studio.
The rendering of detail in the poster will be very different than in this
shot, and color values (and even the presence or absence of leaves on
the trees!) will vary in this subject as the seasons progress. In general
though, you can evaluate detail in the bricks, shingles and window detail,
and in the tree branches against the sky. Compression artifacts are most
likely to show in the trim along the edge of the roof, in the bricks,
or in the relatively "flat" areas in the windows.

This is my ultimate "resolution shot,"
given the infinite range of detail in a natural scene like this, and I
didn't feel that the L4v captured as much detail as I'd expect to see
from a four-megapixel camera. The tree limbs over the roof and fine foliage
in front of the house show pretty good detail, but the finest detail is
lost to a "chunkiness" in the image. Details are slightly soft
throughout the frame, with strong corner softness in the top left corner.
(Corner softness is present in the other three corners as well, but not
as strongly.) The slight overexposure at the camera's default settings
caused it to lose practically all of the detail in the bright white paint
surrounding the bay window, a trouble spot for many digicams. Despite
the overexposure though, detail is also lower than I'd expect in the shadow
area above the front door, evidence of a very limited dynamic range. Overall
color looks quite good though, despite the bright exposure. The table
below shows a standard resolution and quality series, followed by ISO,
sharpness, saturation, and color series.

ISO Series:The L4v's images are on the noisy side. Even at ISO 80, some noise
is visible (despite what looks like attempts to control it with anti-noise
processing that loses a fair bit of detail in the process), and at higher
ISO settings it becomes quite distracting. - I wouldn't actually consider
the ISO 320 setting as usable for most picture-taking.

Sharpness Series:The L4v's in-camera sharpening adjustment covers a good range, but
seems to still add a little sharpening, even on its "low" setting.
- I'd prefer to see the overall range shifted somewhat toward the lower
end of the scale.

I routinely shoot this series of images to show the field of view for
each camera, with the lens at full wide angle, at maximum telephoto (3x,
in this case), and at full telephoto with the digital zoom enabled. The
L4v's lens is equivalent to a 35-105mm zoom on a 35mm camera. That corresponds
to a moderate wide angle to a medium telephoto. Following are the results
at each zoom setting.

Very good color with the Daylight white balance. High resolution,
though bright exposure and high contrast.

This shot is often a tough test for digicams, as the abundance of blue
in the composition frequently tricks white balance systems into producing
a warm color balance. The L4v's Auto was somewhat
tripped up by this obstacle, producing a yellow cast. The Manual
setting did the opposite, producing a rather cool image. Daylight
white balance, however, produced nearly accurate results, though with
a slight warm, reddish cast. Still, skin tones looked best with the Daylight
setting, as did overall color (despite slight purplish tints in the blue
background and in the deep shadows of the blue robe). Contrast is quite
high in this shot, resulting in rather hot highlights on the models' faces.
Resolution is pretty good, and detail is strong in the embroidery of the
blue robe, as well as in the necklaces, flower garland, and instruments.
That said, details are slightly soft, and the high contrast and apparent
anti-noise processing obscures definition in the finer details.

Mediocre macro performance: A large macro area, but good detail.
Flash throttles down, but with strong falloff in the corners.

The L4v did worse than average in the macro category, capturing a large
minimum area of 6.45 x 4.84 inches (164 x 123 millimeters). Resolution
is high, with pretty good detail in the dollar bill, coins, and brooch,
though details aren't terribly well-defined. Some slight corner softness
is visible in all four corners, and details are a bit soft throughout
the center of the frame as well. Exposure is a little bright here, and
contrast is high. Color is nearly accurate, though slightly warm and yellow.
The L4v's flash throttles down a little too
well for the macro area, with strong falloff in the corners of the frame.
Overall, the L4v probably won't be your first choice for macro shooting.

The L4v's Auto white balance setting produced
the best results here, as the Daylight setting
had a strong yellow cast and the Manual setting
a lesser yellow cast. (Color balance is a hint reddish with the Auto white
balance, but the white value is the best overall.) The exposure is a bit
too bright, and contrast is high, but the L4v still manages to distinguish
the subtle tonal variations of the Q60 target. Colors are bright and very
vibrant in the large color blocks, and the additive primary colors (red,
green, and blue) are too saturated. The shadow area of the charcoal briquettes
shows limited detail, and noise is moderate.

ISO Series:At ISO 80 here, the blocks on the MacBeth(tm) chart are quite smooth-looking,
but checking the edges reveals that the smoothness is due to noise suppression,
rather than a lack of noise in the first place. - As a result, fine detail
suffers somewhat, as we saw in several of the images above.

Pretty good low light images, capable of shooting under average city
street lighting at night. Limited autofocus performance though. Warm color
balance, but fairly low noise for the most part.

The L4v produced clear, bright, usable images down to the 1/4 foot-candle
(2.7 lux) light level at all three ISO settings. (You could arguably use
some of the shots taken at the lower light levels, but the lighting is
quite dim.) Color balance is slightly warm, and becomes progressively
warmer as the light level decreases. Noise is pretty low at the ISO 80
setting, high at ISO 160, and very high at ISO 320. The biggest limitation
of the L4v's low light capability is its autofocus performance: It works
reliably only to about two foot-candles, and marginally at one foot-candle.
In a typical night scene, there'll often be brighter reflections within
the frame that the camera will be able to focus on, but for the most part,
you'll need to use the L4v's manual focus option for night shooting. The
table below shows the best exposure I was able to obtain for each of a
range of illumination levels. Images in this table (like all sample photos)
are untouched, exactly as they came from the camera.

(Note: If you'd like to use a light meter to
check light levels for subjects you might be interested in shooting, a
light level of one foot-candle corresponds to a normal exposure of two
seconds at f/2.8 and ISO 100.)

1 fc
11 lux

1/2 fc
5.5 lux

1/4 fc
2.7 lux

1/8 fc
1.3 lux

1/16 fc
0.67 lux

ISO
80

2 secs
F2.8

4 secs
F2.8

8 secs
F2.8

8 secs
F2.8

8 secs
F2.8

ISO
160

1/ 1 secs
F2.8

2 secs
F2.8

4 secs
F2.8

4 secs
F2.8

4 secs
F2.8

ISO
320

1/ 3 secs
F2.8

1/ 1 secs
F2.8

1 secs
F2.8

2 secs
F2.8

2 secs
F2.8

Flash Range Test

Good flash range, but a little ISO "cheating" to get there.

In my testing, the L4v's flash illuminated the test target all the way
out to 14 feet, although intensity decreased noticeably from 11 feet on.
Like many digicams these days though, the L4v "cheats" a little
bit by boosting its ISO rating to achieve the longer flash range. My EXIF
file-header reader showed an odd variation between ISO 120 and 160 that
didn't seem consistent with the distance to the target, but that did seem
to somewhat track the apparent brightness of the images. Below is the
flash range series, with distances from eight to 14 feet from the target.

The L4v performed fairly well on the "laboratory" resolution
test chart, though somewhat below my expectations for a four-megapixel
camera. It started showing artifacts in the test patterns at resolutions
as low as 600 lines per picture height, in both horizontal and vertical
directions. I found "strong detail" only to 1,050 lines in both
directions. "Extinction" of the target patterns occurred around
1,200-1,250 lines.

Optical distortion on the L4v is quite high at the wide-angle end, where
I measured approximately 1.2 percent barrel distortion. The telephoto
end fared much better, as I couldn't even find a full pixel of distortion.
(There was actually about a half-pixel of barrel distortion, corresponding
to a distortion level of about 0.02%.) Chromatic aberration is very low,
showing only about two or three pixels of very faint coloration on either
side of the target lines. (This distortion is visible as a very slight
colored fringe around the objects at the edges of the field of view on
the resolution target.)

The L4v's optical viewfinder is pretty tight, showing only about 82
percent of the final image area at both wide angle and telephoto zoom
settings. Images framed with the optical viewfinder are also somewhat
off-center. The LCD monitor fared much better, showing about 97 percent
accuracy at wide angle, and about 99 percent at telephoto. (Though at
telephoto, the sides of the frame are cut off slightly.) Given that
I like LCD monitors to be as close to 100 percent accuracy as possible,
the L4v's LCD monitor performs well here, but its optical viewfinder
could use some help. Flash distribution is uneven at wide angle, with
a bright center and falloff at the corners and edges of the frame. At
telephoto, flash distribution is more even, though dimmer.